I somehow agree with what you say on Mallika Sherawat's page. First of all, don't get too fascinated by reverting others' work. You had removed the reference I've added. First of all, Rediff.com is the most reliable and unbiased Indian site on the net (you said it's a gossip magazine, quite strange to hear that). Secondly, sex symbol is not a peacock, and see WP:PEACOCK for evidence.

Regarding the writing tone, I do agree with you. Therefore, I've rewritten it and toned it down. Thanks for the help. Best regards, Shahid • Talk2me

Thank you for helping me as I work out how this system works. I am trying to update and enrich sections of Wikipedia which are related to my organization IFOAM the International Federation of Organic Agriculture www.ifoam.org. We are the Umbrella Organization for Organic Agriculture and have an official definition for Organic Agriculture which I am charged with advertising on Wikipedia.

The IFOAM official definition: 'Organic agriculture is a production system that sustains the health of soils, ecosystems and people. It relies on ecological processes, biodiversity and cycles adapted to local conditions, rather than the use of inputs with adverse effects. Organic agriculture combines tradition, innovation and science to benefit the shared environment and promote fair relationships and a good quality of life for all involved.'

I understand that things which are posted on wikipedia will be 'mercilessly edited' and that is fine. The issue is that we represent 'Organic Agriculture' It would be advantageous for us to find a way to have a wiki page for 'organic agriculture' rather than 'organic farming' ..

I guess it is there in so many languages (though the reason for the Slovakian version I don't understand that much either) because of the following reasons: 1) the Danube used to be a very important international shippnig route throughout history, and this point used to be particularly important. 2) This region now belongs to Serbia and Romania, you are right, but it used to belong to several different countries in the past, just like Голубац/Golubac = Taubenberg (German --> Austro-Hungary) = Gögerdsinlik (Turkish)= Galambóc (Hungarian), that used to belong to Serbs, Turks, Hungarians and the rulers changed quite often.Myrmeleon formicarius (talk) 13:32, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

I was trying to find out whether the place is called "Iron Gate" or "Iron Gates" in English. Unfortunately, the article keeps the confusion going by being headed "Iron Gate" (singular) and then continuing to talk about "Iron Gates" (plural). Then there's the incorrect statement that the Romanian and German names for the place both mean "Iron Gates" (plural). The Romanian name "Porţile de Fier" does mean "the Iron Gates", but the German name "Eisernes Tor" means "Iron Gate" in the singular. I think the Hungarian name "Vaskapu" is also singular, otherwise it would probably end in "-k". In short, this article is still very confusing, and makes me wonder how much of the other information in it is correct. For instance, do the Germans really just call the place "Eisernes Tor"? You'd expect the definite article, and then it would be "das Eiserne Tor" (so it isn't just a matter of adding "das" - the ending on the adjective also changes). The Romanian name does include the definite article (the ending "-le"). Bulgarian and Hungarian also have definite articles (the ending "-тe"/"-te" on the adjective and the word "a" respectively), and both are missing from the names given here. The fact that the Dutch word "nederzettingen" (settlements) was originally translated as though it read "bezettingen" (occupations) raises even more doubts in my mind about the reliability of the article. I'm not proposing to correct the article myself - I don't have the expertise, except as regards translation from Dutch and other languages to native English (that's what I do for a living) - but as a user I hope someone who does can clear all this up.212.238.222.19 (talk) 11:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)